My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2006_0612_Packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2006
>
2006_0612_Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/12/2014 10:16:21 AM
Creation date
8/26/2009 3:34:48 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
250
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Regular City Council Minutes — 06/16/03 <br />Minutes - Page 35 <br />City Attorney Squires concurred. <br />Councilmember Klausing expressed concern regarding <br />any liability to the City in stipulating who gets their <br />organization promoted on the signage; and whether the <br />City could limit availability of advertising on the signs <br />(i.e., political groups andlor businesses). <br />City Attorney Squires opined that he didn't have any great <br />concerns regarding First Amendment issues under current <br />City Code. <br />Councilmember Schroeder questioned how the City could <br />dictate and eliminate private enterprises from advertising <br />on the signs. <br />City Attorney Squires opined that these were civic-minded <br />organizations and the signs were popular in numerous <br />communities; and didn't foresee any issues for the City. <br />Councilmember Kough reiterated his support for the civic <br />organizations involved in the signage. <br />Further discussion included provisions for graffiti; size of <br />the City of Roseville portion of the sign in comparison to <br />the organizations' logos; traffic distractions; the numerous <br />entrances to the City not included; and maintenance of the <br />signs. <br />Councilmember Klausing expressed appreciation to <br />Councilmember Kough for his work on the proj ect, and <br />his initiative in pursuing the concept; but with reluctance, <br />spoke against the motion for installation. <br />Councilmember Schroeder spoke against the motion, <br />opining that such signs were a maintenance problem, and <br />his unwillingness to commit the City's maintenance staff <br />to their installation and maintenance; and further opining <br />that they were distracting to drivers, and created additional <br />clutter along the roadways. <br />Councilmember Maschka had no comment. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.